FiftyYears of Corpus Christianorum

(1953-2003)

From Limited Edition Project to Multi-located Scholarly Enterprise

1. Introduction

During the 1940s and 1950s, the foundation was laid for what becamean unprecedented expansion and flowering of the field of patristicstudies. The reaction against the Neo-scholastic hermeneutical frame-work, most notable in France with the nouvelle theè ologie, caused a res-sourcement : a return to the Fathers (including the medieval ones) assources of theological inspiration. The period following World WarII was imbued with a genuine enthusiasm, based on the belief that itwas possible to develop a `new' theology which would bring faith andlife into conversation with one another. Because their theology hadgrown out of a dialogue with their social and cultural environment,the Fathers were considered to be excellent guides for such an en-terprise. This period also saw the declericalisation and deconfession-alisation of patristics, trends which opened the door for a reading ofthe Fathers from humanist and historical perspectives. These newperspectives, in turn, encouraged the introduction and greater utilisa-tion of historical-critical and literary methods. The growing feelingfor ecumenism also contributed to this renewed interest in the Fa-thers, as did the realisation that, in this interesting and challengingfield, there remained a massive amount of research to be done.

It is no coincidence, then, that many important enterprises in pa-tristic studies were launched in this period. One of the earliest was theseries Sources Chreè tiennes. Founded in the 1940s by Danieè lou andDe Lubac, this series, now heading towards its 500th volume, en-deavoured to make the treasures of the patristic and medieval tradi-tion accessible to a wide readership by offering the original text, aFrench translation and an accessible introduction and explanatory no-tes. (1) Other important projects which started during these seminal

ö11ö

(1) The history of Sources Chreè tiennes is described in E. Fouilloux, La collection Sourceschreè tiennes : eè diter les Peé res de l'Eglise au xx e sieé cle (Paris : Eè ditions du Cerf, 1995).

decades were the Reallexikon fu« r Antike und Christentum, (2) the GregoriiNysseni Opera, a thoroughly revised edition of Bauer's Lexicon for theNew Testament and Early Christian literature, A.-M. La Bonnar-dieé re's Biblia Augustiniana and the Prosopographie Chreè tienne du Bas-Em-pire. Ongoing projects reaching fruition in this period were the Pa-tristic Greek Lexicon, finalised by G. W. H. Lampe and Guido Mu« ller'sLexicon Athanasianum. (3) It was during this period of renaissance inPatristics, that Eligius Dekkers founded the Corpus Christianorum.

2. A Monk's Dream (4)

Dom Eligius Dekkers was a Benedictine monk of the Abbey ofSteenbrugge (near Bruges). (5) As a monk, his life was centered on theliturgy. His open study-room, his armarium, was also an oratorium : aplace for prayer and meditation. It is no wonder then, that he was

ö12ö

(2) For the creation and development of the Do« lger-Institut and the RAC, see E.Dassmann, `Entstehung und Entwicklung des ``Reallexikons fu« r Antike und Christen-tum'' und des Franz Do« lger-Instituts in Bonn', in Jahrbuch fu« r Antike und Christentum,40 (1997), 5-18 (with references to older literature). See also the documentation broughttogether by N. M. Borenga« sser, `Briefwechsel Theodor Klauser - Jan Hendrik Was-zink, 1946-1951. Ein zeitgeschichtlicher Beitrag zur Fortfu« hrung des RAC nach demII. Weltkrieg', in Jahrbuch fu« r Antike und Christentum, 40 (1997), 18-38.(3) For a description of these projects, see W. Burghardt, `Current Patristic Projects',

in Theological Studies, 11 (1950), 259-274.(4) For an excellent and much more extensive overview of the first years of the Cor-

pus Christianorum, see M. Lamberigts, `Corpus Christianorum (1947-1955). The Labor-ious Journey from Dream to Reality', in Sacris Erudiri, 38 (1998-1999), 47-73.(5) For a brief biographical presentation of Eligius Dekkers, see M. Lamberigts, `In

Memoriam Dom Eligius Dekkers (1915-1998)', in Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses, 75(1999), 251-254. Portraits of Eligius Dekkers as patrologist, liturgist and participant inthe Flemish movement are offered in the contributions by Georges Folliet, Silveer deSmet SJ and Romain Vanlandschoot in Sacris Erudiri, 38 (1998-1999) : an issue whichcommemorates the life and work of Dom Dekkers. His involvement in the FlemishMovement is also highlighted in R. Vanlandschoot, art. `Dekkers, Jan', in Encyclopedievan de Vlaamse Beweging (Tielt : Lannoo, 1998), 888-889.

engaged in the liturgical movement, which was particularly strong atthat time in Flanders, or that much of his own research was focussedon the liturgy. Under the influence of Romano Guardini and OdoCasel, whom he styled `my revered Master', Dom Dekkers discoveredthe rich legacy of the Church Fathers and their importance for liturgi-cal studies. He considered their writings, letters, treatises, sermons,and travel-stories to be `sacred sources for the study of the liturgy'. (6)Thereafter, though Dekkers was to write many contributions on li-turgical studies in general, the Fathers came to serve as his main angleof approach to liturgy. (7) This is not to say that his study of the EarlyChurch was focussed solely on the liturgy: from the beginning of hisscholarly career Dom Dekkers had been a patrologist and a Churchhistorian. The combination of all these elements shaped his life ; hispassion for liturgy binding together his life and work as a monk, as apatrologist and as a Church historian. (8)As his bibliography shows, (9) Dekkers began his scholarly career in

the 1940s with three important publications. First of all he edited Sa-

cris Erudiri, a volume of collected studies by Mgr. Callewaert, one ofhis predecessors as Chair of Liturgy at the Seminary of Bruges and

ö13ö

(6) E. Dekkers, Odo Casel, Heilige bronnen. XII opstellen over liturgie en monnikendom (Pre-tiosas margeritas, 1), Steenbrugge; Brussels ; Amsterdam; Sint-Pietersabdij : Descleè e DeBrouwer, 1947.(7) See, for example, his study on Tertullian as a liturgical source : Tertullianus en de

geschiedenis van de liturgie, Catholica, 6/2 (Brussels ; Amsterdam: De Kinkhoorn-Descleè eDe Brouwer, 1947) ; or his important article on early monasticism and liturgy: `Les an-ciens moines cultivaient-ils la liturgie?', in A. Mayer, J. Quasten and B. Neunheuser(eds.), Vom christlichen Mysterium. Gesammelte Arbeiten zum Geda« chtnis von Odo Casel OSB

(Du« sseldorf : Patmos Verlag, 1951), 97-114.(8) On Dekkers' contribution to liturgical studies, see S. De Smet, `De liturgie

beschouwd vanuit de tuin van de patristiek', in Sacris Erudiri, 38 (1998-1999), 15-35.(9) A complete bibliography can be found in T.-E. Schockaert, Bibliografie van Dom

Eligius Dekkers OSB, hem aangeboden bij gelegenheid van het verschijnen van de derde editie van de

Clavis Patrum Latinorum, Instrumenta Theologica, 15 (Leuven: Bibliotheek van de Fa-culteit Godgeleerdheid, K.U. Leuven, 1995).

at the Louvain Faculty of Theology. Soon after, he wrote an In-troduction to Liturgy and a book on Tertullian as a source for the liturgyof the early Church. (10) In 1948, when he had already made a namefor himself as a specialist in Early Christian liturgy, the first issue ofthe journal Sacris Erudiri was published. In this issue, following all theother scholarly articles and just before the concluding Onomasticon, acontribution appeared, bearing the conspicuous and laconic title : AProposed New Edition of Early Christian Texts. (11) The article wassigned by `The Editors º Eè tablissements Brepols, Turnhout (Ant-werp) and Monachi S. Petri, Steenbrugge (Bruges)', but clearly DomDekkers, at that time thirty-three-years-old, had been holding the pen.

In that article Dekkers gave a realistic description of five difficultiesinherent to the editions of patristic writings which scholars had had todeal with in the middle of the previous century. (12) The first obviousdifficulty was judging which text was the best available text-editionfor a given work (13) or, when only one edition existed, how to judgeits value. Given the great divergence in the quality of existing edi-

ö14ö

(10) E. Dekkers (ed.), Sacris Erudiri : fragmenta liturgica collecta a monachis Sancti Petri deAldenburgo in Steenbrugge ne pereant (Steenbrugge: Sint-Pietersabdij, 1940) ; Id., Inleidingtot de liturgiek (Brussels ; Antwerp: Standaard Uitgeverij, 1942) ; Id., Tertullianus en degeschiedenis van de liturgie, Catholica, 6/2 (Brussels ; Amsterdam: De Kinkhoorn-Descleè eDe Brouwer, 1947).

(11) Sacris Erudiri, 1 (1948), 405-414. A French translation was published under thetitle Pour une nouvelle eè dition des anciens textes chreè tiens (Steenbrugge; Sint-Pietersabdij :1948). A slightly different German version appeared as `Eine neue Ausgabe Altchrist-licher Texte', in Theologische Literaturzeitung, 74 (1949), 159-163.

(12) This is not to suggest that these difficulties have since disappeared, but, today,scholars are in a much better situation with regard to such problems than they werethree generations ago.

(13) A Proposed New Edition, 405: `All who have, at any time, been concerned withpatristic studies, will know how difficult it is to find a good critical edition of earlyChristian texts. In almost all cases there are, in existence today, several editions of thesetexts, ancient or modern. But of these, which is the best, and on which can we rely?Very often it will not be the most recent.'

tions, and the fact that the quality of text-editions obviously affects

research, this was a thorny and crucial issue and all the more since, as

the contribution says, `the editions of the great Vienna or Berlin col-

lections are not always to be preferred'. (14) The second difficulty was

even greater : how to obtain these editions? When they had been pub-

lished in a well-established patristic collection there was no problem;

but when this was not the case º and all too often it wasn't º scholars

were completely at a loss. Who but a very few specialists would know

that the best editions of several writings of Victorinus of Pettau and

Marius Victorinus were published in the Annual of the Cistercian

College of Withering? How many libraries would have a copy of

Dom Germain Morin's edition of the sermons of Caesarius of Arles,

given the fact that it was published by the Abbey of Maredsous and

had gone out of print very soon after its publication? (15) If one was

fortunate enough to work in a library in which all the necessary edi-

tions were available, there still remained the annoying problem of re-

trieving the correct volume from the shelves. An example of this was

the Corpus scriptorum ecclesiasticorum latinorum, the volumes of which

were numbered in the order in which they were published. The lack

of a general index made it very cumbersome to locate the particular

volume needed (for example, in 1948 the volumes two, four and six of

Ambrosius' opera omnia had been published, as numbers thirty-two,

sixty-two and sixty-four in the CSEL). A fourth problem was that,

though the two major collections existing in 1948, in other words, the

ö15ö

(14) A Proposed New Edition, 408. As an example, I quote the judgment passed on

the existing editions of the Peregrinatio Egeriae, published by P. Geyer in Vol. 29 of the

Vienna Corpus (1892). `As regards the text, we must give preference to the little edition

of W. Heraeus in the Sammlung vulga« rlateinischer Texte (Heidelberg) ; since its third re-

printing in 1929, it also includes the Madrid fragments, published in 1909 by Dom De

Bruyne, and the quotation cited in the Liber Glossarium. Yet to this should now be

added the letter of Valerius of Bergidum,``de beatissimae Aetheriae laude'', re-edited by

P. Garcia-Villada in Analecta Bollandiana [sc. 39 (1910) 393 ss].'

(15) AProposed New Edition, 405-406.

Vienna and the Berlin Corpora, (16) were making steady and sure pro-gress, the completion of their respective projects still seemed very dis-tant. (17) Moreover, a considerable number of texts, especially con-ciliar documents, liturgical and hagiographical texts had been editedin the seventeenth or eighteenth centuries but had not been reprintedsince. As a result, these texts, even if they were not always reliable (forexample, Mansi's collection of conciliar documents) were often hardto find. (18)

To cope with these problems, Dekkers made a radically new pro-posal. First of all a start was to be made with the preparation of aManuductio ad litteraturam patristicam, `which will indicate the best edi-tions extant of all the written documents of Christian Antiquity, aswell as those critical studies that supply any necessary emenda-tions'. (19) Building on the foundation provided by this `guide', thenext step was `the issue, with the consent of the publishers and theireventual compensation, of a new collection of all early Christian texts,according to the best existing editions, more or less on the lines laiddown by Dom Pitra and the Abbeè Migne, now a hundred yearsago.' (20) Each volume of this `New Migne' would offer the Latintext, an apparatus of variant readings, a very concise introduction inLatin on the most necessary matters (essential data on the author, au-thenticity, date, manuscript tradition) and a select bibliography and

ö16ö

(16) This is not to forget the Sources Chreè tiennes, which were, at that time, still ex-panding and building in reputation.

(17) The article makes this point only for the CSEL but it applies equally to theGCS, which, in those decades, was suffering from, inter alia, a lack of material sup-port º a situation only partly alleviated in the final decade of the century (Cf. C. Mark-schies, `Origenes in Berlin und Heidelberg', in Adamantius, 8 (2000), 135-145; see pp.139-140 esp.).

(18) As a particularly telling illustration of all these difficulties, a detailed status quae-stionis was offered with regard to the edition of the writings of Tertullian (A ProposedNew Edition, 408-410).

(19) AProposed New Edition, 411.(20) AProposed New Edition, 411.

indices. Throughout the text, reference would be made to the pagina-

tion of the reproduced edition and, in instances where this was not

possible, to the edition in the CSEL-series or in another widely dis-

tributed collection. The Corpus Christianorum would contain every early

Christian text, including dispersed material such as conciliar docu-

ments, inscriptions, liturgical texts and the like. Anti-christian authors

would also be included, as would pagan historians who discuss Chris-

tian history, such as Procopius and Ammianus Marcellinus. The Cor-

pus would be organised on a chronological, geographical and sys-

tematic basis and include all known Christian texts down to the

Carolingian period. Later authors would also be included, if their

writings contained information shedding light on the period covered

by the Corpus. Initially, Dekkers envisaged a Series Latina and a Series

Graeca, while a Series Orientalis might follow later. Whenever an an-

cient Greek translation of a Latin author existed, this would be in-

cluded in the Series Latina and vice versa. Moreover, the Series Graeca

would also contain a Latin translation or a translation into a modern

international language. The best available translation would be se-

lected to that end, `if possible, one from the version of the text re-

produced'.

This, in all its boldness, was Dekkers' dream, or rather, his project.

In his daily research he had encountered stumbling blocks and now he

was initiating an attempt to remove them. His purpose was a very

practical one : to put within reach of every scholar or student a com-

plete series of early Christian texts, as far as possible in modern critical

editions. He also expected that many libraries would seize the oppor-

tunity to have the complete patristic literature available on their

shelves, simply by taking out a subscription to the Corpus Christiano-

rum. Efficiency and speed were, therefore, imperative : Dekkers plan-

ned to put 120 octavo volumes of 600 pages each on the market with-

in ten years. He also planned to publish only a limited number of

copies of each volume, so as to more easily incorporate, within sub-

sequent reprints, improved editions which had been published else-

where in the interim. In sum: it was not Dekkers' dream to come up

ö17ö

with the definitive critical edition of every single early Christian textbut `only' to give scholars a more secure and accessible foundationfrom which to work. Because Dekkers realised very well that he couldnot execute this audacious enterprise on his own, he concluded hisproject proposal with an urgent call for collaboration:

There is no need to point out how much work and equipment suchan enterprise demands. It is no less indispensable to know preciselythe desiderata of the learned public. So we should gladly receive theopinions of specialists and we shall readily consider every sugges-tion, whether technical or scientific. The initiators of the C.C. willbe grateful to all who will in this way facilitate their task and willeagerly welcome any criticism, guidance or advice that anyonemight be good enough to send them. ... Hence we beg all thosewho are interested in this matter to make known to us their objec-tions and their wishes concerning our proposal. We hope, also, toreceive criticism, as penetrating as it will be kindly, once the Manu-ductio ad litteraturam patristicam has appeared; for it will, so to speak,serve as the detailed working-plan of the Corpus Christianorum whichwe hope to produce. (21)

Thus ends the short article which marked the official beginning ofthe adventure of the Corpus Christianorum. Before the project wasmade public, however, two major obstacles had been negotiated. Thefirst concerned obtaining permission from authors, editors, publishersand series' committees to re-edit their texts. As the plan was to startwith the Series Latina, the Scientific Board of the CSEL-enterprise,based at the Oë sterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften in Vienna,was the major dialogue-partner in this regard. On 3 December, 1947,Dekkers received from the board a response which was, overall, posi-tive. Prof. Dr. Meister, then head of the Kirchenva« ter-Kommission,wrote Dekkers that they had no objections to the new enterprise andthat the CSEL did not consider it to be in conflict with its own pro-

ö18ö

(21) AProposed New Edition, 414.

ject. On the other hand, the Vienna-enterprise didn't see any reason to

change its own plans in view of this new initiative. For Dekkers,

however, the most important element in Meister's reply was surely

that, in principle at least, permission had been granted for the CorpusChristianorum to make use of the CSEL-editions. The only conditionswere that this be clearly indicated and that further particulars be ne-

gotiated on a case-by-case basis.

The second dialogue-partner to convince was Brepols publishers.

After a few early, unsuccessful attempts, some common ground was

found during a meeting in Turnhout on 14 August, 1947, during

which the initial plans became more concrete. Brepols agreed to test

the water by issuing a project-description in French and English. If

reactions to this initial proposal were favourable, the following step

would be the production of the Manuductio. If reactions to this book

were favourable, then Brepols would consent to become engaged in

the enterprise of publishing the Corpus Christianorum.Overall, the reaction in the scientific world to the proposal were

positive indeed, though many also expressed their concerns and called

for caution. A very encouraging and laudatory reaction came from the

American Jesuit J. Burghardt, in an overview of `Current Patristic

Projects' which he wrote for the widely circulated Theological Stu-dies. (22) The Jesuit J. de Ghellinck, though not concealing his doubts,

was also cautiously optimistic and sympathetic towards the enterprise.

He made some suggestions and wished the enterprise well. (23) Asked

for an opinion by Dekkers, Cardinal Mercati, a widely respected

scholar in the field of patristic and medieval textual criticism, an-

swered that the Corpus Christianorum was certainly very useful but he

doubted whether many libraries and scholars would be able to afford

to buy it, and was concerned that such an immense work would

ö19ö

(22) W. Burghardt, `Current Patristic Projects', in Theological Studies, 11 (1950), 259-

274.

(23) J. de Ghellinck, `Un nouveau Migne en perspective', in Nouvelle Revue Theè olo-gique, 70 (1948), 512-516.

require the most competent of collaborators and was so ambitious

that it might never be finished. (24) A more negative voice in the choir

of approval and encouragement came from Professor Peterson

(Rome), who doubted the usefulness of publishing a text-edition

without an accompanying translation, `given that scholars these days

do not know Latin well enough' (25). One who had been downright

negative since 1945 when first consulted by Dekkers, and who had

remained so throughout the whole preparation phase, was Paul

Peeters SJ, the famous Bollandist. He criticised the project as `im-

possible to realise' and even `dangerous', because of the technical dif-

ficulties and financial risks involved. (26) Equally dismissive was the

Dutch patrologist, J.H. Waszink. In particular, he had difficulty en-

visaging the relationship between the CSEL and the new Corpus.

What would be the scientific value of such re-editions? In his view,

the time was not yet ripe for harvesting a new Migne. Surely it would

be better to focus on editing various as yet unpublished writings

which were urgently needed? (27) Nevertheless, despite these negative

reactions, Dekkers generally received a good deal of encouragement

from his peers.

Thus, the first obstacles on the way to the Corpus Christianorum were

overcome: the CSEL did not object and Brepols had, in principle,

become engaged in the enterprise. The definitive contract for the Cor-

pus Christianorum between Brepols and the Abbey of Steenbrugge was

signed on 25 January, 1950 (even before the Manuductio was publish-

ed). (28) For Dekkers, it must have been a great relief that most of his

colleagues and fellow-patrologists were supporting him, while most

ö 20ö

(24) Letter from Mercati to Dekkers, 25 June, 1948. Cf. M. Lamberigts, `Laborious

Journey', 52.

(25) Letter from Dekkers to Brepols, 23 July, 1948, quoted in M. Lamberigts, `La-

borious Journey', 51.

(26) Letter from Peeters to Dekkers, 26 May, 1945. Cf. M. Lamberigts, `Laborious

Journey', 52.

(27) J. H. Waszink, `Current Topics : A New Migne', in Vigiliae Christianae, 3

(1949), 186-187.

of the criticisms about the project were objections he himself must

have considered and reconsidered before initiating the project. More-

over, Dekkers had never had any illusions about the `definitive char-

acter' of his project. He only wanted to offer scholars a tool with

which to work but he fully realised that, within a hundred years, a

new series would probably be needed to replace the one he was now

about to begin. (29) The groundwork thus laid, Dekkers could move

on to the next phase of the project : the preparation of the Manuductio,

an enterprise that would bring its own difficulties.

3. Realising the Dream: The Clauis and the First Editions

In the 1950s, there were already quite a few good general handbooks

on the Early Church, some focusing on the history of Late Antique

Christian literature, others presenting a history of doctrine. However,

these surveys, though excellent, didn't pay much attention to the as-

pect of textual criticism. This was precisely the lacuna Dekkers aimed

to fill with his Manuductio : it was to be

a `nomenclature' of every ancient Christian text, not only patristic,but also hagiographical, liturgical and judicial, which would pointout the best available editions and indicate suggested corrections oremendations proposed in specialised articles and reviews. Further-more, it could refer to manuscripts as yet unknown to the publish-ers or not used by them. (30)

Besides being a guide for the CC enterprise, the Manuductio would

also serve to legitimise it, because it would demonstrate the progress

made by patristic textual criticism since Migne: for approximately

ö21ö

(28) About the negotiations between Dekkers and Brepols, see M. Lamberigts, `La-

borious Journey', 54-55.

(29) Letter from Dekkers to Mercati, 7 July, 1948; see M. Lamberigts, `Laborious

Journey', 53.

(30) M. Lamberigts, `Laborious Journey', 55-56.

two-thirds of the Christian texts in Latin prior to the Carolingian Re-

naissance, a better edition was available in the 1950s than the one

printed in the PL. Moreover, several hundred texts included in the

Manuductio were not available in the PL, partly because of oversight

and partly because they hadn't yet been discovered. (31) Hence the

need for a `new Migne'.

The preparatory work on the Manuductio was done in close co-

operation with the CSEL in Vienna and in particular with Aemilius

Gaar. The correspondence between Dekkers and Gaar runs from the

summer of 1948 to the summer of 1951, the time the Manuductio went

to the publisher. (32) Apparently, Dekkers had contacted Gaar because

he had learnt of a bibliography in Vienna which might be useful for

his work. In fact, Gaar's bibliography was an alphabetical list of all

authors and every patristic work in Latin down to the eighth century.

The list was presented in eleven columns, containing the following

elements : the period from which each document dated; the name of

the authors; the title ; the edition in PL, the edition in CSEL ; refer-

ences to other existing editions (where relevant) ; references to the in-

dex of the Thesaurus Linguae Latinae, to Schanz-Hosius-Kru« ger (33) and

Teufel-Kroll ; (34) and, finally, references to other related books or ar-

ticles. In this way, some 2000 fiches had been prepared, one third of

which had already been drafted in the described table-form. In the

aftermath of the war, publication of this material didn't seem a realis-

tic possibility. In a letter dated 4 July, 1948, Gaar declared his will-

ingness to put this material at Dekkers' disposal, expressing the hope

that it might be useful and that, at the very least, his contribution

would not go unmentioned in the final publication. On 14 July, Dek-

ö 22ö

(31) E. Dekkers, `Le ``Nouveau Migne''', in Scriptorium, 4 (1950), 274-279; see p. 277.

(32) On the preparation of the Manuductio and the collaboration between Dekkers

and Gaar, see M. Lamberigts, `Laborious Journey', 55-62.

(33) M. Schanz, C. Hosius and G. Kru« ger, Geschichte der Ro« mischen Literatur (Munich,

1905 ss).

(34) W. Teuffel, W. Kroll, Geschichte der Ro« mischen Literatur (Leipzig, 1916, ss).

kers replied in a very positive way, stressing the common features be-tween his enterprise and the one in Vienna. At the same time, he tookcare to point out that he had prepared more than twice as many fichesthan Gaar, and this with regard to a corpus of Latin Christian textsbelonging to a shorter time-frame. In this letter, Dekkers also ex-pressed his willingness to explore possibilities for further collabora-tion. During their ensuing correspondence, it was agreed that Gaarwould send the material that was already laid out in table form toDekkers, and that an effort would be made to present the informationon the remaining fiches in the same lay-out. The whole of this materi-al was dispatched from Vienna to Steenbrugge on 1 December, 1948.Gaar's material certainly gave Dekkers a great advantage which furth-ered the progress of the Manuductio considerably. The collaborativespirit of their correspondence continued throughout the followingyear : their letters reflect a continuously high level of constructive ex-change. From December 1949 onwards, however, their degree ofcontact diminished considerably. In a letter dated 10 October, 1950,Dekkers apologised for his silence to Gaar, assuring him that he hadworked relentlessly on their common enterprise and that the workwas drawing to its close. (35) Indeed, Dekkers had done a great deal ofwork on the project throughout 1950. He had finished his own com-pilation of the material to be included; he had evaluated Gaar's mate-rial and, where necessary, inserted it into his own. He had also cometo the conclusion that it would be necessary to omit some informa-tion, because otherwise the Manuductio would come to between 700and 800 octavo-pages. To solve this problem, he decided to drop thereferences to the TLL and to Teuffel and to reduce the tables to analphabetical list of authors, with a simple reference to the volumenumber in the Corpus in which their writings would be found. Wheninformed of these changes in early October 1950, Gaar didn't objectas such but replied that he would only give his approval after he had

ö 23ö

(35) `Entretemps, je n'ai pas perdu de vue notre commun ouvrage, bien au contraire.J'y travaillai sans relaê che, et je crois pouvoir Vous assurer enfin: Omnia parata sunt !'.

seen a definitive version. He also expressed his dissatisfaction with the

title Manuductio and suggested, as an alternative title for the work,

Conspectus litterarum patristicarum.

One can see how a certain tension crept into the Vienna º Steen-

brugge relationship when contact resumed between Dekkers and Gaar

after this long period of silence, and this tension was only to become

worse in the months that followed. On 17 January, Dekkers sent the

first galley-proofs of the complete work to Gaar. In a detailed letter

accompanying these proofs he informed Gaar about, among other

things, the time limitations on the project. Dekkers had succeeded in

obtaining a publication grant from the Universitaire Stichting but this

was subject to the condition that the work be published before 31

March. There was, in other words, no time left to make any changes

or even to correct the galley-proofs. Gaar immediately protested

against the lack of time to correct the proofs properly. On 5 February,

he sent a long reply to Dekkers in which he expressed his own dis-

satisfaction, as well as that of Dr. Meister of the Kirchenva« ter-Kom-

mission, with the fact that Dekkers had, by and large, dropped the ta-

bles which had been prepared in Vienna. Gaar felt that he had been

presented with a fait accompli. He insisted, therefore, that the work not

be presented as a joint publication but that Dekkers should assume

full responsibility for it and that this be made clear on the title page as

well as in the foreword. In addition to that, Gaar rather sourly point-

ed out that Dekkers had never before mentioned the deadline of 31

March and that, on the basis of his initial reading of the proofs, it was

most unlikely that the work would be ready in time.

Dekkers responded that he would try to obtain an extension from

the Universitaire Stichting, since he agreed with Gaar that the time con-

straints were not acceptable. And he had more news for his Austrian

colleague: he had found a mecenas willing to support the project.

Clearly, Dekkers had felt the irritation in Gaar's letters and he now

went out of his way to explain and apologize : apologize, because he

hadn't kept his Austrian colleagues well enough informed; and ex-

plain, by referring to the unexpectedly heavy workload involved in

ö24ö

the compilation of the Manuductio. At the same time, however, he

didn't hesitate to gently chide Gaar about the latter's tardiness in

evaluating some material (24 pages) that Dekkers had sent him some

eighteen months before.

Gaar's reply to Dekkers, dated 1 March, 1951, shows that this had

served to dispel the tension between them. He warmly congratulated

Dekkers, said repeatedly that Dekkers had produced a magnificent

work and added that his own name shouldn't be mentioned on an

equal level : a `praeparante et adiuvante Aemilio Gaar' would be suffi-

cient. He also gave his consent for Dekkers to ask Cardinal Mercati

for his patronage of the project, and he agreed to read not only the

first but also the second galley-proofs and proposed as a dedication:

Ioanni Cardinali Mercati sacrum. When, at the end of February, the Uni-

versitaire Stichting also agreed upon a six-month extension for the pub-

lication, almost all impediments to publication were removed. The

only remaining bone of contention between Dekkers and Gaar was

the title of the work. Following a suggestion of the Bollandist Gros-

jean, Dekkers adhered to the title Clauis Patrum Latinorum. Gaar,

however, had philological objections to this title and this became the

subject of a lively correspondence between the two from April to

June in 1951. In the end, Dekkers stood firm and, eventually, Gaar

capitulated.

At the beginning of September 1951, the Clauis Patrum Latinorum

rolled off the press (36) as the third yearbook of Sacris Erudiri. (37) The

reaction of the scholarly world was, without exception, laudatory.

ö 25ö

(36) At that time Sacris Erudiri was not yet published by Brepols but by Beyaert

(Bruges) and Martinus Nijhoff (The Hague).

(37) Clauis Patrum Latinorum qua in nouum Corpus Christianorum edendum optimas quasque

scriptorum recensiones a Tertulliano ad Bedam commode recludit Eligius Dekkers ; opera usus qua

rem praeparauit et iuuit Aemilius Gaar, Sacris Erudiri : jaarboek voor godsdienst-

wetenschappen, 3 (Steenbrugge: in Abbatia Sancti Petri, 1951).

Outstanding scholars, such as Balthasar Fischer, Almut Mutzenbecher

and Wilhelm Schneemelcher, expressed their admiration without re-

serve. (38) Indeed, to everybody in patristic research it was clear that,

with this Clauis, a new and important tool for the study of the Latin

Fathers had been created. The Clauis also put the Steenbrugge abbey

firmly on the map of patristic scholarly research. The scholarly con-

tacts that arose during the preparation of the Clauis and in reaction to

its publication, now expanded Dekkers' `network', and this was to be

of great importance for the continuing growth of the enterprise.

However important the judgment and the praise of his peers must

have been, For Dekkers, the most essential element was that this Cla-

uis had now laid a secure foundation on which the Corpus Christiano-

rum could be built.

With the completion of the Clauis, the next and greatest challenge

was to start producing the first editions in the Series Latina. All in all,

it must be acknowledged that this did not proceed as smoothly as an-

ticipated. The inevitable delays were caused, depending on the case,

by the team at Steenbrugge, by Brepols or by individuals editors.

Of course, preparations for publishing the first text-editions were

already underway prior to the publication of the Clauis. In February

1950, Brepols had begun experimenting with the development of a

suitable lay-out for the CC, at first employing the two-column format

used in the `Old Migne' and later, on the insistence of Dekkers, mov-

ing towards the lay-out which the volumes have today. In November

of the same year, Dekkers had provided Brepols with a list of scholars

who had agreed to collaborate and with a detailed list of works that

were to be included in the CC. Yet, it would be 1953 before the first

ö 26ö

(38) B. Fischer, in Theologische Literaturzeitung, 77 (1952), 287-289; A. Mutzenbecher,

in Deutsche Literaturzeitung, 74 (1953), 411-413; W. Schneemelcher, in Zeitschrift fu« r

Kirchengeschichte, 64 (1952/53), 338-340.

fascicles rolled of the press. On 16 May, 1951, Brepols were already

expressing their impatience in a letter to Dekkers, inquiring when the

first manuscript would arrive. On 1 September, Dekkers had to reply

that, for the time being, he was wholly preoccupied with the Clauis

and that he had not yet any manuscripts ready to send. Dekkers also

took this opportunity to inform them that a re-estimation of the

number of volumes needed for the Series Latina had now placed the

figure at around 175 volumes instead of the projected 120. In the same

letter, however, he could at least report some good news: first of all,

that the Spanish Consego Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas was

prepared to cover the costs of the edition of the Church Fathers of

Spanish origin, on the condition that this support was duly rec-

ognized and that a number of free copies were made available to the

Consego. The other good news was that, as a consequence of the

publication of the Clauis and due the fact that the CC was now better

known in wider circles, an increasing number of people were inter-

ested in participating in the project. In June 1953, Dekkers could send

to Brepols a list of fifty-five guaranteed collaborators and seventeen

more that had pledged to make a contribution. Most of these scholars

were European, though some were affiliated with institutions in the

USA. In the end, only some of these seventy-two scholars would fulfil

their promise of collaboration, but it was, nonetheless, very encour-

aging. Of equal importance for the project was the fact that, by June

1953, more than 200 customers had subscribed to the series. To attract

an even greater number of subscribers, Brepols and Dekkers con-

tinued to work on producing translations of the prospectus in French,

English, German, Italian and Spanish. The distribution of this pro-

spectus in so many languages reflects the cosmopolitan approach of

the CC : right from its inception, the project aimed to reach schol-

ars from all major language groups, something it still endeavours to

achieve in 2003. In this prospectus, the aims of the project were brief-

ly presented, announcing some 175 volumes of 600 to 800 octavo-

pages, followed by a Conspectus totius collectionis which was concluded

with an announcement of the inaugural, forthcoming volumes (`Mox

ö 27ö

prodibunt'). (39) This prospectus was to be distributed together with

the first volume of the CC, containing numbers one and two of the

Clauis : Dekkers' own edition of Tertullian's Ad martyras and Borleffs'

recently reworked critical edition of Ad nationes. (40)

This was not, however, what Dekkers had originally planned. In-

itially, he had wanted to start by publishing the excellent edition of De

anima by J.H. Waszink. Having obtained permission from Meulen-

hoff, the original publisher, Dekkers hoped to be able to publish De

anima as the first instalment of the CC before the end of 1952 º within

a year after the publication of the Clauis. He considered it of para-

mount importance to produce a good result as quickly as possible, in

order to increase the subscribers' confidence and to attract new sub-

scribers. Brepols, however, had objected to the plan to start the en-

terprise by only publishing such a small portion of Tertullian's Opera

Omnia. Dekkers grew impatient and, as an alternative, came up with

the idea of starting the CC with the publication of his own edition of

Ad martyras, together with Borleff's edition of Ad nationes. Dekkers

got his way and a first instalment, containing these works (together

with a brief introduction, a select bibliography and a survey of manu-

scripts and testimonia) was published early 1953 and distributed along

with the prospectus.

The continuation and completion of Tertullian's Opera Omnia was

also hampered by difficulties and delays. Some of these were due to

unexpected causes (such as a long wait for photographs of a manu-

script from Leningrad) but it seems that the main cause was Dekkers'

ambition to produce, not mere reprints, but editions which, within

the bounds of what was realistically possible, would demonstrate

some scientific progress in comparison with those already published.

ö28ö

(39) It should be added that most of the works on this list announced as `mox prodi-

bunt' were published only years later, many of them by editors other than the ones to

which the writings in question were originally assigned.

(40) Originally published in Leiden, 1929, it was thoroughly revised by Borleffs for

re-publication as part of the CC.

In order to assuage Brepols' irritation about the delay in receiving

ready-to-print-manuscripts, Dekkers offered, in March 1954, to put at

least the first volume on the market, an idea which Brepols rejected

because it would double the postal costs. Brepols' main concern was

to be able to set, lay-out, correct and print systematically : a wish

coinciding with Dekkers' own wish to produce editions which, as far

as possible, incorporated recently discovered manuscripts or emenda-

tions suggested in the most recent literature. (41) All this, along with

further delays caused by time-consuming corrections to proofs and

the compilation of indices, meant that Tertullian's Opera Omnia were

only published in the beginning of 1955 as volumes one and two of

the CC. (42) The bulk of this edition, which was well received, con-

sisted of newly edited texts or thoroughly revised earlier editions. For

Dekkers, at least, the fact that the CC team had been largely able to

surpass the standards set by the original plan, certainly made up for

the delay and the slow progress.

Fortunately for the project, Dekkers had realised early on that

strict adhesion to the order given in the Clauis would result not only

in extremely slow progress overall but also in years where no volumes

would appear at all, and would almost certainly make it impossible to

come even close to the production rate proposed at the outset of the

project. For that reason, he had already decided, at a very early stage,

that works should be published if and when the opportunity arose,

regardless of their place in the order of the Clauis. An early example of

this method can be seen in the edition of Caesarius of Arles (SL 103-

104). Dom Morin had published an edition of this work in 1937 in

ö 29ö

(41) This happened with regard to the edition of several writings of Tertullian pre-

pared by Borleffs, and was also the case with the text of Ad Praxean, for which Dekkers

wished to take into account the observations of J. H. Waszink in his review `Q. Septimi

Florentis Tertulliani Adversus Praxean Liber. Tertullian's Treatise Against Praxeas. The Text

Edited, with an Introduction, Translation and Commentary by Ernest Evans (London: SPCK,

1948)' in Vigiliae Christianae, 7 (1953), 246-253.

(42) Though the title page gave the date as 1954, to avoid the impression that 1954

had been a `lost year'.

Maredsous, but a fire had destroyed most of the stock, to the extentthat, ten years later, it was virtually impossible to find a copy. Dek-kers acted swiftly and was able to send a ready-to-print text to Brepolsas early as 1951. This time, however, Brepols caused a delay, prompt-ing Dekkers to complain that, a full year after the submission of thetext, Steenbrugge still hadn't received proofs. The proofs didn't ar-rive until January 1953, and it was to be a full year after that beforethe text was finally published.

Another opportunity came in 1954, which was the year in whichthe 1600th anniversary of the birth of Augustine would be celebratedand Dekkers thought one or more volumes of the doctor gratiae inthe CC would be a suitable way to mark the occasion. A large inter-national conference to be held in Paris in September of that yearwould also provide an ideal forum in which to present the new vol-ume(s). However, it was not to be: the edition of the Tractatus in Io-hannis Evangelium experienced several delays and was not ready untilNovember 1954 and the re-publication of B. Dombart and A. Kalb'sedition of De civitate Dei did not appear until 1955. The latter wasoriginally published in the Teubner series (1928-1929), (43) but the re-edition profited from corrections made subsequently by Kalb (44) andalso included the text of Augustine's letter to Firmus, containingguidelines for the structure of the work. (45) The re-publication wasnecessary and timely because Teubner's stocks had been destroyedduring the war and almost no copies had survived. In 1955, the firstvolume of Beda Venerabilis, containing the opera homiletica et rhyt-mica, was also published (SL 122), while 1956 saw the publication ofAugustine's monumental Enarrationes in Psalmos (SL 38-40).

ö30ö

(43) B. Dombart and A. Kalb (eds.), Sancti Aurelii Augustini episcopi De civitate Dei li-bri XXII, Bibliotheca scriptorum Graecorum et Romanorum Teubneriana 1104-1105, 2vols (Leipzig : Teubner, 1928-1929).(44) Cf. Philologus, 87 (1932), 477-480.(45) Cf. C. Lambot, `Lettre ineè dite de S. Augustin relative au ``De civitate Dei''', in

Revue Beè neè dictine, 51 (1939), 109-121.

At that time, the enterprise of the Corpus Christianorum was well un-derway and despite mutual irritations due to delays caused by bothparties, a constructive relationship had been built between Brepolsand Dekkers. Moreover, in general the first volumes had been verywell received by the scholarly community, as Ludwig Bieler's reviewin Scriptorium attests :

Individual volumes differ considerably in their standards of editor-ship. This is the price that had to be paid if the series was to becompleted within a reasonable time. I feel that the price has beenworth paying. At the moment when so many standard editions areout of print, when stocks have been largely destroyed by militaryaction, there is a great and urgent demand for good workable texts.This minimum requirement is invariably met and very often sur-passed.

At the end of his detailed review of all the separate volumes, Bielerpraised the CC as `an enterprise which, together with the VaticanVulgate and the Beuron Vetus Latina, continues, in these troubledtimes, the great tradition of Benedictine scholarship'. (46) Such a re-sponse shows that the first volumes of the CC were warmly welcomedand that they were, right from the start, publications exhibiting thesort of rigorous scholarship respected within the world of patristicstudies. In short, the problems experienced at the outset of the en-terprise had been overcome and a solid basis had been laid for theproject's ongoing growth and expansion. All this augured well for thefuture of the CC.

4. Expanding the Dream (1956-1969)

In the years leading up to 1969, when the publication of the fiftiethvolume of the CC was celebrated, the initial aims of the project had

ö31ö

(46) L. Bieler, `Corpus Christianorum. Series Latina. Eè ditions Brepols, Turnhout,1954-1955', in Scriptorium, 10 (1956), 322-324.

been successfully met and surpassed. The Series Latina flowered and

became established as an important series of text-editions. Moreover,

with the beginning of the Continuatio Medieualis, a new project was

launched which would alter the face of the Corpus Christianorum and,

in terms of the number of volumes published, would ultimately be-

come more important than the Series Latina.

Between 1957 and 1968, the Corpus Christianorum published thirty-

eight volumes in its Series Latina. Many of these were re-editions of

texts previously published elsewhere. A number of Jerome's ex-

egetical works stand as a case in point : the Hebraicae quaestiones in libro

Geneseos, the Liber interpretationis hebraicorum nominum and the Commen-

tarioli in psalmos (SL 72, 1959) ; the Tractatus siue homiliae in psalmos (SL

78, 1958) ; the In Hieremiam prophetam libri vi (SL 74, 1961). Other vol-

umes contained re-editions of hagiographical and historical texts,

reprinted from the MGH (SL 117, 1957) or from the CSEL. An ex-

ample of the latter appears in the volume of Itineraria and other Geo-

graphica (SL 175, 1961). In addition to simply reprinting such works

from the CSEL, various other works which had previously appeared

through other publishing houses were also revised by a team of col-

laborators comprising, among others, J. Fraipont, F. Glorie, M.

Adriaen and one of Dekkers' fellow monks from the abbey at Steen-

brugge, R. Willems. Dekkers and his team followed this method fre-

quently during this early period. Instead of simply reprinting editions

(albeit the best one available in each case) they reviewed each text

thoroughly, inserting corrections and checking the text against some

of the best manuscripts available or, alternatively, against those

manuscripts which had not been used by the former editor. The Ter-

tullian had already been prepared along these lines, but from 1954 to

1971 this would become standard procedure, resulting in the publica-

tion of several exegetical works of Augustine (SL 33, 36, 38-40), Am-

brosius (SL 14), Jerome (SL 73, 73A, 75, 75A, 76, 76A, 77), Cassio-

dorus (SL 97-98) and Gregory the Great (SL 142). All these editions

filled lacunae and nobody could, or did, doubt their usefulness. The

succinct introduction and the survey of the textual transmission ac-

ö32ö

companying each work were, in themselves, highly valued and pro-vided scholars with documentation which, in the past, had often beeninaccessible. Moreover, since these editions incorporated readingsfrom other good manuscripts, the revised text-editions in the CC wasalso derived from a larger material basis, with the result that the textof these editions was, in most cases, more trustworthy than that fea-tured in earlier editions. One should also keep in mind that, in offer-ing such revised editions, the initial purpose and goal of the CC hadalready been surpassed. Thus, in later years, Dekkers did not hesitateto include revised editions or reprinted editions in the CC when hesaw fit to do so or when the opportunity arose. The most recent ex-ample, appearing in 2000, was the re-edition of Ambrosius' De officiis

according to the Budeè -edition by M. Testard (1984-1992). These re-editions and revised editions shaped the CC and their publicationhelped to make Dekkers' dream a tangible reality. The next step,moreover, was already evident. From the early sixties, when the re-vised edition of the Clauis Patrum Latinorum was published, (47) it wasclear to Dekkers that, ultimately, only with new, modern, critical edi-tions could he solidly establish the reputation of the Corpus and offerthe level of the sound, text-based scholarship to which the CC ulti-mately aspired. Such new editions would be based on a study of thecomplete transmission of the text, presenting this material in the in-troduction as well as the results of the analysis in a reliable text with adetailed critical apparatus. This did not, of course, constitute a com-pletely new direction in the history of the CC. Even in the very firstyears of its existence, such new editions had been prepared: one recallsthe works of Eusebius of Vercelli (V. Bulhart ; SL 9, 1957) and theSermones of Maximus of Turin (A. Mutzenbecher ; SL 23, 1962). Butin those early years, revised editions had been the rule and new

ö33ö

(47) The second edition, published in 1961, contained some 180 extra pages and acouple of dozen texts omitted from the first edition were added by inserting a, b, c,and so on in the numbering. Some texts mistakenly attributed to the patristic periodwere also put between square brackets so as not to disturb the range.

editions the exception. The balance gradually shifted during the six-ties and the seventies, when re-editions and revised editions largelydisappeared from the Series Latina. Thus, the Series Latina entered itsnext phase, with the emphasis now on publishing new, modern, cri-tical editions.

While these developments were taking place and while the Steen-brugge-team, together with various external collaborators, were giv-ing shape and foundation to the Series Latina, the indefatigable EligiusDekkers had already descried another challenge. At the time when helaunched the Corpus Christianorum, Dekkers chose Tertullian and theVenerable Bede as the chronological limits for the enterprise. Yet hedidn't exclude the possibility that later authors could also be included,particularly if their writings threw light on the events of the period inquestion. (48) Barely a decade later, and with the Series Latina only justbegun, he wanted to turn to the Middle Ages and incorporate theChristian literary heritage of this period into the editorial work. In anarticle in the 1957 issue of Sacris Erudiri, he presented his plans. (49)

The problems, Dekkers observed, encountered by a researcher ofChristian medieval literature were not the same as those occurring inrelation to patristic literature. Hence, the solutions he proposed werealso different. In the field of Latin patristic literature, editorial workhad made such progress since Migne that, of the 2350 patristic writ-ings dating from the period between Tertullian and Bede, only some350 were, at the time, not available in a more reliable text-edition thanthe one printed in the first ninety-six volumes of Migne. In light ofthis circumstance, the major focus could now be on improving thequality of existing text-editions and on bringing these high-qualityeditions together in a Corpus.With regard to the medieval Christian lit-erature from the period after Bede, the first difficulty imposing itself is

ö34ö

(48) Cf. Dekkers, AProposed New Edition, 413.(49) Dekkers, `Pour une nouvelle eè dition de la litteè rature latine meè dieè vale,' in Sacris

Erudiri, 9 (1957), 377-390.

its size : there is so much more material that it simply defied any attemptto bring it all together into one single Corpus. Moreover, while thelion's share of Latin patristic literature had already been edited, this wasnot the case for these later documents, the bulk of which were unedited.As a result, Dekkers concluded, it made little sense to begin by prepar-ing a `Clauis Medii Aevi'. (50) For the same reason, it would also be in-sufficient to simply `redo' volumes 97 to 217 of the PL. For Dekkers,the solution to both problems was clear : on the one hand, the volumesof thePL had to be correctedwhere necessary; on the other, they had tobe supplemented by editions of the unpublished works. (51)

With regard to the corrections for volumes 97 to 217 of the PL,Dekkers wanted to proceed as follows. Brepols had acquired fromMigne the remainder of the stock of both the Patrologia Latina and thePatrologia Graeca and the right to reprint them. (52) The very first goalwas to guarantee that the volumes containing medieval texts remainedavailable permanently. As soon as there was sufficient interest for aparticular volume, a photomechanic reprint of this volume would bepublished. Moreover, such a volume would contain an extensive prae-fatio, which would update it and inform the reader of the actual stateof the question (with regard to authorship, dating, and so on). Theprefaces would also include an up-to-date bibliography, including ref-

ö35ö

(50) Now, fifty years later, such an instrument is being compiled for sources with aFrench provenance: Corpus christianorum. Continuatio mediaevalis. Clavis scriptorum latino-

rum medii aevi. Auctores Galliae 735-987. Thus far, two volumes have appeared: one onAbbon de Saint-Germain - Ermold le Noir (1994) and one on Alcuinus (1999).

(51) `Si les eè tudes de patristique latine ont progresseè e surtout en profondeur, visant aéprocurer des textes plus purs et mieux eè tablis, le progreé s des eè tudes meè dieè vales s'estmanifesteè en largeur, en eè tendue (...) Il n'y a donc pas lieu, du moins en ce moment, derefaire les tomes 97-217 de la Patrologie latine, mais de les corriger et de les compleè ter'(`Pour une nouvelle eè dition', 380).

(52) The revision of the Series Graeca was entrusted to the monks of the abbey ofChevetogne. A few instalments of this re-edition have appeared: In tomos 44, 45, 46 Pa-

trologiae Graecae ad editionem operum Sancti Gregorii Nysseni introductio, published by Brepolsin 1959 (the author of the introduction is not mentioned).

erences to more recent and reliable text-editions. Finally, the prefacewould also point to other writings of the same author, edited or un-edited, which were absent in the volume. (53) As a service to the reader,these updates to current scholarship in the preface to each reprintedvolume of Migne, would also be published separately. With regard tovolumes 97 to 217 of the PL as a whole, specific instruments wouldbe compiled, listing additions and corrections to the material inMigne.By proceeding in this way, Dekkers hoped to ensure that the mate-

rial in Migne would remain at the disposal of scholars and students,while the updates would make up for its shortcomings. One sees veryclearly how Dekkers' scientific concerns went hand-in-hand with hispragmatism and with Brepols' commercial interests. No doubt hisvery first impulse must have been to proceed with regard to the med-ieval texts in the same way as he had in relation to the Series Latina : inother words, to `redo Migne' in the sense that they would produce re-editions or revised editions. But there was simply too much ground tocover to make this a realistic possibility. Moreover, one also suspectsthat Brepols, which had not long been engaged in the enterprise andwhich had, up to 1957, only published some ten volumes in the Series

Latina, was not all that eager to dive into a new adventure involvingthe systematic re-edition or revision of the `Medieval Migne'. Theplans described by Dekkers were thus a compromise between whatwas scientifically desirable and what was realistically and commerciallypossible. Ultimately, the team of the CC only partially attained theirgoal : the reprints of Migne, incorporating the extensive preface andlists of additions and corrections, were never published, but Brepolshas ensured, to this very day, that the PL remains available.Though the correction of Migne proved unsuccessful, the opposite

must be said about Dekkers' plan to supplement the work. Here the

ö 36ö

(53) `Pour une nouvelle eè dition', 381.

intention was to bring together all the texts which had been eitheromitted by Migne, or were inadequately edited by Migne, or werediscovered only after the Migne edition. These rules were, however,applied with common sense. Texts for which a good and accessibleedition existed, such as the opera omnia of Anselmus, would not beincluded. The same held for texts edited in series such as the Acta

Sanctorum or the MGH as well as for texts which were already includedin special collections, such as the Corpus scriptorum de musica. All in all,Dekkers estimated, forty volumes would suffice for this supplementto Migne, which was to be called Corpus Christianorum. Continuatio

Mediaeualis (CM). The chronological limits were more difficult to de-termine: the beginning of the collection was, of course, the death ofBede, but the end was not so easily defined. In particular, Dekkerswanted to go beyond Innocent III, with whose writings the PL con-cluded, but he did not indicate precisely how much further. Nor didDekkers, in his programmatic essay, unequivocally state that he in-tended to publish modern critical editions for the CM, of a kindwhich would meet the highest standards (instead of revised editions),but the description he outlined for the editions he proposed certainlygave that impression. (54)

Copies of Dekkers' programmatic essay were widely distributed tolearned journals, societies and individual scholars. In general, the re-actions were positive. Readers were encouraged to respond seriouslyto the call for ideas, suggestions and criticisms at the end of severalreview articles. `The plan is good and shows a realistic sense of what isneeded and of what is practicable.' (55) `Seules les abbayes beè neè dictinessont aé meê me de mener aé bien des publications d'aussi longue haleine:

ö37ö

(54) `Nous nous inspirerons avant tout du souci de mettre aé la disposition du lecteurdes textes suê rs, susceptibles d'eê tre controê leè s au moyen d'un apparat critique, avec reè feè -rence aux sources. Chaque volume du recueil contiendra eè galement des tables deè tailleè esqui faciliteront les recherches' (`Pour une nouvelle eè dition', 382).

(55) Review in the Journal of Theological Studies, 60 (1959), 464.

uno aulso non deficit alter. Quel deè tachement!' (56) `Au moment oué ilsse mettent au travail, les eè diteurs souhaitent recevoir les suggestions etcritiques de tous les meè dieè vistes inteè resseè es. Souhaitons que chacun lesaide de son mieux aé reè aliser une oeuvre si utile, mais en meê me temps silourde.' (57) `Les grandes lignes, treé s raisonnables, du projet sont ex-poseè es et l'on ne peut que souhaiter de voir la reè alisation s'effectueravec la meê me rapiditeè que celle de la premieé re seè rie.' (

58)This last wish º that the realisation of the CM might happen with

the same speed as that of its predecessor º certainly didn't come true.After the first announcement in 1957, it was only in 1966 that the firstvolume in the series was published. The reason for the delay is notclear. Were Dekkers and his team too caught up in the many editionsthat were being prepared for the Series Latina? Had the slow progressresulted from the first number in the CM being devoted to an editionof Aelred of Rievaulx' Opera ascetica (eventually published in 1971)?Whatever the reason, the CM made up for such delays soon after itsinception. Having produced one volume in 1966 and one in 1967, theyearly number of published volumes gradually increased. In 1971,fourteen volumes had been published, and these were as diverse as theOpera ascetica of Aelred of Rievaulx (A. Hoste & C. Talbot ; CM 1,1971), the Opera theologica (vols. I and II) of Petrus Abaelardus (E.Buytaert ; CM 11-12, 1969), the first three books of a canonical collec-tion in five books (M. Fornasari ; CM 6, 1970), writings by Rupert ofDeutz (De diuinis officiis, In euangelium sancti Iohannis and De sancta trini-tate et operibus eius ; H. Haacke; resp. CM 7; 9 and 21, 1967-1969-1971)and Paschasius Radbertus' treatise De corpore et sanguine Domini (B.Paulus; CM 16, 1969).

The diversity among the writings included in the CM stemmedfrom the fact that no Clauis had been prepared beforehand. As the ti-

ö 38ö

(56) Review by E. Ernout in Revue de philologie, de litteè rature et d'histoire anciennes, 34(1960).

(57) Review by F. Masai in Scriptorium, 12 (1958), 298.(58) Revue des sciences philosophiques et theè ologiques, 43 (1959), 187.

tles given above show, the CM could and would develop in all direc-

tions, making it a collection with little inherent unity. The absence of

a Clauis also had another consequence: since the volumes were, for the

most part, numbered according to the chronological order in which

they were published, it is not always easy to find a particular volume.

Fortunately, the inclusion of an Onomasticon at the end of the more

recent volumes offered a remedy for this problem. These undeniable

faults should not detract from the fact that the CM has, so far, offered

some 200 volumes of excellent editions, comprising an unparalleled

variety of texts, which makes it a singularly important resource for

medieval studies. One wonders whether a single volume of the CM

would ever have appeared, had Dekkers made the opposite choice and

insisted on first preparing a complete Clauis Medii Aevi.

The year 1969 was a landmark in the history of the Corpus Christia-

norum. In that year the Series Latina reached its fiftieth volume: an edi-

tion of Augustine's De trinitate by W. Mountain. On 16 January,

1969, the CC and the Abbey of Steenbrugge lavishly celebrated this

event. The celebration was attended by some 125 guests : scholars,

friends of the CC and friends of the abbey. An academic session also

took place on this occasion, presided over by Mgr. A. Descamps,

Rector of the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven. (59) Anselm Hoste

sketched the history of the Corpus and stressed that the celebration of

the fiftieth volume should only mark a brief break, before continuing

the journey well into the twenty-first century. (60) The main lectures

were delivered by Michele Cardinal Pellegrino (Torino) and Christine

Mohrmann (Nijmegen). Pellegrino addressed the question: `Saint

ö39ö

(59) The texts of the lectures during this session have been published in a commem-

orative volume: Sessio academica qua die XVI mensis Januarii anni MDCCCCLXVIIII

Steenbrugis Corpus Christianorum diem festum celebravit voluminis editi quinquagesimi (Turn-

hout : Brepols, 1971).

(60) A. Hoste, `Overzicht van de werkzaamheden van en rond het C.C.', in Sessio

academica, 5-8.

Augustin, a-t-il reè aliseè l'uniteè de sa vie?' (61) while Mohrmann dis-cussed a more philological topic : `Tertium genus. Les relations ju-da|ë sme, antiquiteè , christianisme, reè fleè teè es dans la langue des Chreè -tiens'. (62)

In the many occasional speeches during the banquet, there was am-ple opportunity to put the spotlight on the people at Steenbruggewho were relentlessly working for the CC. At the time, the team as-sisting Dekkers consisted of five full-time scientific collaborators : J.Fraipont, F. Glorie, R. Vander Plaetse, P. Callens and M. Geerard.Besides these five collaborators, Dekkers could also rely on the sup-port of several confraters : A. Hoste (his `right hand'), B. Lambert, (63)A. Dumon (the librarian), (64) F. Rommel and A. Pil. (65) In theirturn, the Steenbrugge-team expressed their thanks to the group of (atthat time, already) 200 national and international collaborators whohad offered assistance or were preparing editions for publication inthe SL or the CM. It is remarkable that the religious affiliations with-in this group of collaborators were extremely diverse: not only Ro-man-Catholics, Anglicans and Greek-Orthodox, but also atheists and

ö40ö

(61) M. Pellegrino, `St. Augustin, a-t-il realise l'unite de sa vie?', in Sessio academica,25-38. An Italian translation can be found in Problemi attuali di teologia : puntualizzazionecritica e prospettive. Conferenze della facoltaé teologica salesiana [Sezione Torinese] 1972-1973,Biblioteca di scienze religiose, 7 (Zu« rich: Pass Verlag, 1973), 11-27. The contributionwas also included in Id., Ricerche patristiche (1938-1980) (Torino: Bottega d'Erasmo,1982), 77-93.

(62) C. Mohrmann, `Tertium genus. Les relations juda|ë sme, antiquiteè , christianisme,reè fleè teè es dans la langue des Chreè tiens', in Sessio academica, 11-22.

(63) His main research project was the Bibliotheca Hieronymiana : B. Lambert, Bibliothe-ca Hieronymiana manuscripta: la tradition manuscrite des oeuvres de Saint Jeè roê me. I.A. Epistolaeet B. Conspectus abbreuiationum bibliothecarum. II. Opera scripturistica, homiliae tractatus, opus-cula. III. Spuria and IVA. Opuscula necnon excerpta nondum identificata et B. Indices, Instru-menta Patristica, 4 (Steenbrugge: Sint-Pietersabdij,1969-1972).

(64) For him and his involvement in the Flemish Movement, see R. Vanlandschoot,art. `Dumon, Jozef', in Encyclopedie van de Vlaamse Beweging (Tielt : Lannoo, 1998), 1014.

(65) He was also involved in the Flemish Movement. See G. Leemans, art. `Pil,Miel', in Encyclopedie van de Vlaamse Beweging, 2477.

others to whom religion mattered little. The CC originated in an ab-

bey and, at the time, quite a few collaborators were monks or mem-

bers of the clergy, but the circle certainly was not limited to the mon-

astic world. For Dekkers, the only thing that mattered was the

scientific quality of the work that was submitted and this reflected in

the diversity of the project's collaborators. (66)

5. Sharing the Dream (1969-1996)

The celebration in 1969 of the fiftieth volume in the Series Latina was

a celebration of more than two decades of dedicated work. The hard

labour had paid off, the enterprise had been fruitful and it had all been

worthwhile. The Corpus had become a well-established scientific en-

terprise that had gained the recognition and respect of the scholarly

world, which had now largely abandoned its initial caution. At the

same time, however, this culmination of twenty years' work also

marked a turning point. From 1969 onwards, the CM began to be

really successful and the number of volumes that had to be produced

at Steenbrugge were increasing exponentially: in 1968 only four vol-

umes rolled off the press at Brepols ; in 1969 there were eight and in

the following years that number would be almost always exceeded

and, in more recent years, even doubled. When one realises that the

team-members at Steenbrugge were preparing editions and doing

other scholarly work, besides turning manuscripts that had been sub-

mitted as books, one can understand that, with the Series Latina and

the Continuatio Mediaeualis, the journal Sacris Erudiri and the series

Instrumenta Patristica, they had reached their `maximum-capacity'. In

ö41ö

(66) This is in contrast to a commentator who wrote that the enterprise of the CC

has `einen leichten Hauch von Kerzen und Weihrauch' : E. Overgaauw, `Antiquiert

oder aktuell ? Moderne Editionen von theologischen lateinischen Werken der Spa« t-

antike und des Mittelalters', in Die Funktion von Editionen in Wissenschaft und Gesellschaft

(Berliner : Beitra« ge zur Editionswissenschaft, Band 3, 1998), 205-225; p. 215 esp.

the decades to follow, the CC kept growing continuously, but thiswas, in one way or another, the result of other independent en-terprises that were brought under the aegis of the Corpus Christiano-

rum. This meant that the fruits of these scholarly projects were pub-lished as a separate series or that they were incorporated within anexisting series (most notably the CM) or, alternatively, attached to thelatter as subsidia or supplementary volumes. This development trans-formed the CC from a research institute in an abbey at Steenbruggeinto a conglomerate of various enterprises, with centres scatteredacross Europe, but all united under the flag of the Corpus Christiano-

rum. At present the centre at Steenbrugge consists of three full-timemembers: R. Vander Plaetse (since 1964), R. Demeulenaere (since1973) and L. Jocqueè (since 1984). These days, their role in the CC

project has become an auxiliary one: the lion's share of their time isdevoted to going through submitted manuscripts and making themready for publication (in the SL and the CM), though they all alsoprovide research-assistance and contributions to the content whennecessary. (67)

Before describing this evolution in detail, another development ofthe last twenty-five years ought to be mentioned. Under the directionof Paul Tombeur, a number of Latin and Greek lexicographical toolshave been produced. First published in paper editions and on micro-fiche, and since 1991 on CD-Rom, these tools have made the CC muchmore accessible. They have also made it possible to address questionspertaining to linguistic and lexicological analysis, which, in the past,have been extremely time-consuming. This not only helps in thepreparation of text-critical editions and in the study of an author's

ö 42ö

(67) The most recent publications by the members of the Steenbrugge-team:J.-M. Cleè ment and R. Vander Plaetse (eds.), Facundi episcopi ecclesiae Hermianensis opera

omnia, Corpus Christianorum. Series Latina, 90A (Turnhout : Brepols, 1974) ; R. De-meulenaere (ed.), Verecundi Iuncensis Commentarii super cantica ecclesiastica ; Carmen de satis-

factione paenitentiae, Corpus Christianorum. Series Latina, 93 (Turnhout : Brepols, 1976) ;L. Jocqueè and L. Milis (eds.), Liber ordinis Sancti Victoris Parisiensis, Corpus Christiano-rum. Continuatio Mediaevalis, 61 (Turnhout : Brepols, 1984).

vocabulary, but it might also be of great advantage when one is trying

to ascertain the authorship of a particular work. Moreover, in the last

few years the CD-Roms and electronic tools (soon also to be accessed

via the internet) have made it possible to integrate the material of the

CC into larger units, establishing links with other tools such as dic-

tionaries and texts edited outside the CC.

Because he wanted the CC to include every early Christian text,

Dekkers had already explicitly proposed the creation of a Series Graeca

alongside the Series Latina in his programmatic essay of 1948. (68) For

practical reasons he had decided to start with the Series Latina and add

the Graeca later ; the possibility of a series of Oriental texts was even

contemplated at that time. Two decades later, the increasing amount

of work involved in the SL and the CM (the latter not having been

part of the plan in 1948) seemed to defy any attempt to start up a third

series. Then, in 1969, Maurits Geerard joined the CC as a collabo-

rator, (69) choosing the Greek Fathers as his preferred field of re-

search. He started, ab ovo, a new project : the compilation of a Clauis

Patrum Graecorum. In Dekkers' opinion, this Clauis would serve as the

preliminary tool for the Series Graeca, analogous with the Clauis Pa-

trum Latinorum. After years of intense labour, the first volume of the

Clauis was published in 1974, treating the authors of the fourth cen-

tury. It was universally greeted with enthusiasm. (70) In 1983 the

complete CPG was published, with the indexes following in 1987.

However, even before the completion of the first volume of the

CPG, preparations had already begun for launching a Series Graeca.

Geerard, Dekkers and Brepols were the initial instigators of the

project, which began in the early seventies, but the assistance of

Marcel Richard was soon sought for the project. Richard, the famous

ö43ö

(68) AProposed New Edition, 412-413.

(69) On Geerard's biography, see J. Noret, `Maurits Geerard (1919-1999)', in Sacris

Erudiri, 39 (2000), 429-437.

(70) Some reactions to the first volume have been collected in J. Noret, `Maurits

Geerard', 436-437.

patrologist and editor of texts, would become the project's firstDirector. His years of experience in researching, cataloguing andmicrofilming manuscripts (71) and the many contacts he had in thescholarly world meant that he was ideally placed to establish the SeriesGraeca. Thanks to him, esteemed scholars such as Cornelius Datema,Franc° oise Petit, Joseph Munitiz and Karl-Heinz Uthemann (to nameonly a few) agreed to offer text-editions to be published in the firstvolumes of the SG. Richard himself contributed the first volume ofthe series : an edition of John of Caesarea, which was published post-humously in 1977. (72)On 25 November, 1972, Maurits Geerard presented the new series

to a meeting of the Socieè teè Belge d'Etudes Byzantines. (73) According

to Geerard, the Clauis would be the key to the enterprise, the ultimategoal of which was analogous to the SL : replacing Migne with a seriesof reliable text-editions. These could be modern, new critical editionsbut re-editions were not excluded. (74) Under Richard's influence,preference would be given to unedited or incompletely edited textsand to authors whose works had been edited in a very dispersedway. (75) Reading the report of Geerard's presentation of the SG withthe benefit of hindsight, one is tempted to smile, for, since then, the

ö44ö

(71) Culminating in his famous Reè pertoire des bibliotheé ques et des catalogues de manuscritsgrecs, the third edition of which (revised by J.-M. Olivier) was published as a subsidiumto the CC. A sympathetic portrait of Richard's activity is given by C. Kannengiesser,`Fifty Years of Patristics', in Theological Studies, 50 (1989), 633-656; see esp. pp. 641-642.(72) M. Richard (ed.), Iohannis Caesariensis presbyteri et grammatici Opera quae supersunt,

edito Marcello Richard, appendicem suppeditante Michaele Aubineau, Corpus Christianorum.Series Graeca 1 (Turnhout: Brepols, 1977).(73) See the report of this conference by E. Voordeckers, in Byzantion, 43 (1973),

496-504, with a summary of Geerard's lecture on pp. 500-502.(74) `A ces inconveè nients [sc. similar to the ones sketched by Dekkers when launch-

ing the SL] ... la Seè rie Grecque du Corpus Christianorum devrait remeè dier en reè unissantles bonnes eè ditions disperseè es d'un meê me auteur, et en offrant de nouvelles eè ditions cri-tiques' (E. Voordeckers, conference report, Byzantion, 43 (1973), 496-504; see pp. 500-501).(75) E. Voordeckers, conference report, Byzantion, 43 (1973), 496-504; see p. 501.

project has followed a rather different path. Though replacing Migne

is still the aim of the SG, the editors have always preferred quality

above quantity. So far, some fifty volumes have been published, all

critical editions of the highest standard, mostly of writings dating

from the Byzantine period.

Thus, in the early seventies, the foundations for the SG were laid.

Soon after, however, Richard became ill. At about the same time, it be-

came clear to Geerard that the team at the Abbey did not have the com-

petence or the material resources (an adequately equipped library in par-

ticular) to guarantee the highest scholarly standards for the editions in

the SG, a fortiori, when the assistance of Richard was no longer sure.

Though Dekkers would have liked to keep the responsibility for the

SG within the walls of the abbey, it was decided that it would be bet-

ter to see whether an academic unit at a university, with the appro-

priate financial and human resources, would be willing to assume re-

sponsibility for the Series Graeca. In 1976, Geerard went to the

Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, to see whether the Centre for Helle-

nisme en Kristendom, that had been established there in 1973, (76) would

be interested in pursuing the project. His proposal was received with

great enthusiasm and the research centre included the SG in its pro-

gram. On 7 July, 1976, a formal agreement was signed between Bre-

pols Publishers, the Corpus Christianorum, represented by Dekkers and

Geerard, and the centre Hellenisme en Christendom, represented by the

Professors A. Van Roey and G. Verbeke. Sadly, Marcel Richard, the

co-founder and first Director of the enterprise, did not live to see this

agreement brought to fruition: he died on 15 June, 1976. He had,

nevertheless, been able to write a contribution for the beautiful bro-

chure with which the series was introduced to the scholarly world.

Besides Richard's presentation of the series (in French, English and

German), the booklet also contained the editio princeps by G. Astruc

ö45ö

(76) On the origins of this Centre, modelled after the institute Antike und Christentum

in Bonn, see A. Van Roey, `Corpus Christianorum, Series Graeca (CCSG)', in Epheme-

rides Theologicae Lovanienses, 71 (1995), 277-280; esp. pp. 279-280.

Morize of the Pseudo-Chrysostomic Sermo Phrophylacticus II. The pub-lication of this brief sermon showed the scholarly world, and far bet-ter than any commentary, what the SG was aspiring to accomplish. Aseditors charged with guaranteeing that the highest scholarly qualitywould be pursued, the brochure named Marcel Richard (+), A. VanRoey (Director), G. Verbeke, E. Dekkers and M. Geerard (secreta-rius). In 1982 Professor Carl Laga took over the direction of the SG

from Van Roey and in 1994 he was, in his turn, succeeded by Pro-fessor Peter Van Deun. (77) Other scholars who have since becomeengaged in the SG, in one way or another, are Joseè Declerck, Con-stant De Vocht and Jacques Noret. The latter compiled, together withM. Geerard, a Supplementum to the CPG. (78)Over the following decades, the SG became increasingly in-

dependent as an enterprise and is nowadays firmly situated within theLouvain Faculty of Arts and its Instituut voor Vroegchristelijke enByzantijnse Studies, though it still maintains a good working re-lationship with both the CC unit at Steenbrugge and with the CC as awhole.

In the case of the Series Graeca, the initiative had begun with the CC

unit at Steenbrugge and then, over time, had gradually become amore independent enterprise. For other similar projects, however, theexperience was reversed. From the mid-seventies onwards, the fruitsof a number of external research projects were proposed for inclusionwithin the CC. The first completely external research enterprise to beintegrated within the CC in this way was the edition of the LatinOpera Omnia of Raimundus Lullus. Some 250 works by this brillianttheologian, mystic and indefatigable missionary to the Muslim world,

ö46ö

(77) For the activities and the output of the SG, see the notes by A. Van Roey inEphemerides Theologicae Lovanienses, 58 (1982), 201-202 and 71 (1995), 277-280.(78) Clavis Patrum Graecorum. Supplementum, cura et studio M. Geerard et J. Noret,

adiuvantibus F. Glorie et J. Desmet, Corpus Christianorum (Turnhout: Brepols, 1998).

have been preserved in Latin (alongside a smaller collection in Cata-lan). The critical edition of the complete Corpus Lullianum Latinumis the main purpose of the Raimundus-Lullus-Institut, which wasfounded by F. Stegmu« ller in 1957 at the Albert-Ludwigs-Universita« tin Freiburg im Breisgau. As a result of the activity of this Institute,five volumes of the Opera Omnia were published at Palma de Mallorcain relatively quick succession between 1959 and 1967. (79) After aninterval in the publication of new volumes, the Raimundi Lulli Opera

Latina were incorporated into the CM in 1978 as a distinctive sub-series. Since then, almost every year a volume has been published andthe editors anticipate that, for the time being, they will be able tomaintain this pace.

In 1981, another external research project was similarly broughtunder the aegis of the CC, when a fourth major series was added: theSeries Apocryphorum. The main aim of this series is the publication ofthe Christian apocryphal writings. Essentially, these include writingswhich are usually called the apocrypha of the New Testament, but theseries also embraces editions of pseudepigraphs and other texts inwhich the main subject is a character from the Scriptures. The series isedited by members of the Association pour l'Etude de la Litteè ratureApocryphe (AELAC), an organisation based at the Universiteè deLausanne (Switzerland) and supported by the Universities of Paris andGeneva. (80) In 1981, an agreement was signed with Brepols and theCC and, all in all, one can say that the idea of initiating this series hasproven to be most felicitous. First of all, it involved texts which,while worthy of inclusion within a Corpus of Early Christian litera-

ö47ö

(79) Vol. I (opera 213-239) : J. Sto« hr (ed.), Opera messanensia anno 1313 composita (Pal-ma de Mallorca, 1959) ; Vol. II (op. 240-250; 251-280) : J. Sto« hr (ed.), Opera messanensia;Opera tuniciana annis 1314-1315 composita (Palma de Mallorca, 1960) ; Vol. III (op. 118) :A. Soria Flores (ed.), Liber de praedicatione. Dist. I - Dist. IIA (1304) (Palma de Mallorca,1961) and Dist. IIB: Centum sermones (Palma de Mallorca, 1963) ; Vol. V (op. 154-155) :H. Riedlinger (ed.), Parisiis anno 1309 composita (Palma de Mallorca, 1967).

(80) See the yearly `Bulletin de l'AELAC' (no. 12 in 2002) and the website of theAELAC at http ://www.unil.ch/aelac/.

ture, did not fit easily in any of the existing series because of theirmultilingual and intricate transmission. Secondly, the specific char-acter of these texts also made the creation of a separate series prefer-able. The start of a new subseries, moreover, also made it possible tofollow a method of organisation which differed from those used inother existing series. The SA arranges its material in `dossiers', pro-viding, in each volume, all the writings which contribute directly orindirectly to our knowledge of an apocryphal text. An extensive in-troduction and commentary are also incorporated, as well as transla-tions in a modern international language.While this series had been formally initiated in 1981, the first vol-

ume, an edition of the Acta Iohannis by Eè . Junod and J.-D. Kaestli,was published in 1983. Since then, fourteen sturdy volumes have beenproduced, among them the Acta Andreae by J.-M. Prieur (1989), theAscensio Isaiae by Norelli et alii (1995), the Acta Philippi by Bovon andAmsler (1999) and the first volume of the Apocrypha Hiberniae, editedby a large multidisciplinary team (2001-2002). Besides the SA proper,a series of Instrumenta is also being developed. This includes claves tothe apocrypha of both the New Testament and the Old Testament,compiled by M. Geerard and J.-C. Van Haelewyck, respectively. (81)Recently, a series of concordances was launched with the volume onthe Acta Philippi. (82) Other studies, collections of data and auxiliaryresearch are also intended for inclusion within this series of Instrumentafor the SA. A journal, Apocrypha, now in its thirteenth year, alsoforms part of the SA project. The AELAC makes every effort pos-sible to make this apocryphal literature available to a wider lay rea-dership, by offering (French) translations, introductions and com-mentaries in the multi-volume `Collection de poche Apocryphes', with

ö48ö

(81) M. Geerard, Clavis Apocryphorum Novi Testamenti, Corpus Christianorum. Seriesapocryphorum, 1992; J.-C. Haelewyck, Clavis Apocryphorum Veteris Testamenti (CorpusChristianorum. Series apocryphorum, 1998.(82) F. Amsler and A. Frey, Concordantia Actorum Philippi, (Turnhout ; Brepols,

2002).

a similar presentation also appearing in a volume of the Pleiade se-ries. (83) Overall, it must be acknowledged that within the space oftwenty years, the AELAC has already realised many of the originalaims of the project, and the increasing number of scholars attracted tothe apocrypha may be taken as a guarantee that this research con-centration will continue to flourish. From the point of view of the CCthis means that a considerable part of the corpus of early Christian lit-erature, which remained, at first, completely outside the scope of theCC, is now firmly integrated, an integration which should prove to bebeneficial for SA, SL, SG and CM alike.

In the eighties, the series of the CC became a ready host for severalsubseries. The first example can be seen in the Series Graeca, whichhosts the Corpus Nazianzenum. The primary goal of this research pro-ject, based at the Universiteè Catholique de Louvain-la-Neuve (Bel-gium), is the publication of an edition of the Greek text of the Ora-tiones of Gregory of Nazianze, followed by the Oriental versions ofthis text (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Arabic, Ethiopian, Slavonic). Inaddition to editing the different version of the Orationes, the volumeeditors also provide detailed indications in the footnotes of where theOriental text differs from the Greek. Editions of various ancient com-mentaries on Gregory's writings and their Oriental versions (for ex-ample, the Greek text and the Georgian version of Pseudo-Nonnus'Commentaries on four Orations), as well as occasional publi-cations (84) or volumes of collected studies pertinent to the editionproject (Studia Nazianzenica) are also included in the Corpus Nazianze-num. In 1988, the first volume appeared, and, fifteen years later, theseries has reached its sixteenth. No doubt the editions in the CorpusNazianzenum constitute an immense enrichment for the CC, and they

ö49ö

(83) F. Bovon and P. Geoltrain (comp.), Eè crits apocryphes chreè tiens I, Bibliotheé que dela Pleè iade, 442 (Paris : Gallimard, 1997).

(84) For example, the very first volume: B. Coulie (ed.), Versiones orientales, reperto-rium ibericum et studia ad editiones curandas Corpus Christianorum. Corpus Nazianzenum,1; Corpus Christianorum. Series Graeca, 20 (Turnhout; Brepols, 1988).

now form an integral part of the latter : not only do they contribute to

our knowledge of the transmission of Gregory's Orationes and to the

`definitive' edition of their Greek text, but they also serve as a splen-

did document which demonstrates the diffusion and assimilation of

texts and ideas in the various spheres of the Christian Orient.

At about the same time as the incorporation of the Corpus Na-

zianzenum in the SG, the SL came to host the Scriptores Celtigenae. The

purpose of this subseries is to publish a corpus of all the exegetical

and homiletical texts of Irish origin or connected to Ireland, dating

from the period between 650 and 800 AD. Interest in these texts orig-

inated from a seminal essay by B. Bischoff in Sacris Erudiri of

1954, (85) and was continued during the sixties and the seventies in the

work of R. McNally. (86) Eventually, these proposals culminated in

the agreement between the Irish Biblical Association and the Royal

Irish Academy to edit these texts systematically in one collection. In

1987 the CC agreed to include the Scriptores Celtigenae as a subseries

and, to date, four volumes have been published: two in the Series La-

tina and two more in the Continuatio Mediaeualis. (87) This enterprise is

also the flagship of current Hiberno-Latin studies. (88)

ö 50ö

(85) B. Bischoff, `Wendepunkte in der Geschichte der lateinischen Exegese des

Fru« hmittelalters,' in Sacris Erudiri, 6 (1954), 191-281; revised edition in his Mittelalter-

liche Studien. Ausgewa« hlte Aufsa« tze zur Schriftkunde und Literaturgeschichte, vol. 1 (Stuttgart :

Hiersemann, 1966), pp. 205-273.

(86) Most notably R.E. McNally and J.F. Kelly (eds.), Scriptores Hiberniae minores,

Corpus Christianorum. Series Latina, 108 B-C (Turnhout : Brepols, 1973-1974).

(87) J. Carracedo Fraga (ed.), Liber de ortu et obitu patriarcharum, Corpus Christiano-

rum. Series Latina, 108E; Scriptores Celtigenae, 1 (Turnhout : Brepols, 1996) ; M. Ca-

hill (ed.), Expositio euangelii secundum Marcum, Corpus Christianorum. Series Latina, 82 ;

Scriptores Celtigenae, 2, (Turnhout : Brepols, 1997) ; G. MacGinty (ed.), Inter Pauca pro-

blemata de enigmatibus ex tomis canonicis nunc prompta sunt praefatio et libri de Pentateucho Moy-

si, Corpus Christianorum. Continuatio Mediaeualis, 173; Scriptores Celtigenae, 3

(Turnhout : Brepols, 2000) ; L.T. Martin (ed.), Homiliarium Veronense, Corpus Christia-

norum. Continuatio Mediaeualis, 186; Scriptores Celtigenae, 4 (Turnhout : Brepols,

2000).

Other subseries worthy of note here and incorporated within the

Continuatio Medieualis, are the almost completed Opera Omnia of Jan

Van Ruusbroec, the Brabantine mystic, and the recently launched edi-

tion of the writings of Geert Grote (Gerardus Magnus). There is also

the subseries of the Autographa Medii Aevi, featuring facsimile-editions

of manuscripts, with detailed analyses of the medieval script. Finally,

the series Hagiographies also forms part of the CM. This is a collective

work, which aims to present a general history of the narrative hagio-

graphical literature from its origins down to the Council of Trente.

Three volumes have been published to date.

6. Looking Towards the Future

The nineties were a period of consolidation and stabilisation. Promis-

ing subseries such as the Autographa Medii Aevi and the Opera of Ge-

rardus Magnus were started, but, unlike the decades before, no new

major series was launched. This provided some breathing space dur-

ing which to pose the question: what about the future of the Corpus

Christianorum? Which direction to follow? What areas should receive

primary attention? What would be encouraged, what belongs to our

`province' and what doesn't? There was also the looming issue of

what was going to happen when Eligius Dekkers was no longer

around. Dekkers himself felt the weight of this last question. During

the 1990s, he was gradually realising that due to the physical handi-

caps of his age he could no longer marshal the energy necessary to direct

the CC as he had in the past. This forced him to consider how to hand

over his legacy to the next generation, a transition he tackled with

characteristic purposefulness. During the first years of the 1990s, he

ö51ö

(88) A brief, inviting introduction to the difficulties and possibilities of Hiberno-

Latin studies today, is offered in M. Herren, `The Training of the Hiberno-Latinist', in

J. Petruccione (ed.), Nova et Vetera: Patristic Studies in Honor of Thomas Patrick Halton

(Washington DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1998).

had already been assisted in the direction of the CC by L. De Coninck

(K.U. Leuven/KULAK) and L. Van Acker (University of Ghent).

The latter, however, had passed away unexpectedly in 1995. With

Maurits Sabbe, a Louvain Professor of New Testament Studies, as

intermediary, Dekkers managed to persuade Professor Fernand Bos-

sier to become his successor. Bossier, thanks to his contributions to,

inter alia, the Aristoteles Latinus, was a skilled philologist and specialist

in the critical edition of Medieval Latin texts, and had retired from his

academic positions in Antwerp and Leuven. He agreed to become in-

volved in the Corpus Christianorum and took up his commission for a

period of five years in 1997 (renewed in 2002). Bossier knew that

scientific research on such a scale could only be achieved through

team-work: he formed a Scientific Committee, composed of aca-

demics from all the Flemish Universities, and named Paul Tombeur

(UCL) as the director of the Cetedoc arm of the project. (89) From

1998 onwards, this organisation worked smoothly and when Dekkers

passed away on 15 December, 1998, he knew he had not only founded

and developed an important and internationally recognised scholarly

enterprise, but that it had also been passed on successfully to future

generations.

In recent years, the Scientific Committee has largely maintained

Dekkers' original direction in the ongoing development of the CC,

meaning that it is and will remain, in the first instance, a philological

enterprise, aimed at making the treasures of the Christian Late An-

tique and Medieval past more accessible. (90) This is also reflected in

ö52ö

(89) Today, the members of the Scientific Committee are R. Beyers, G. Declercq,

L. De Coninck, J. Goossens, M. Lamberigts, P. Tombeur, M. Van Uytfanghe,

P. Verdeyen and A. Derolez.

(90) Of course this does not preclude that monographs primarily dealing with the

content of texts are published as well, as has been done in some recent volumes of Instru-

menta Patristica et Mediaevalia (IPM): J. Borsje, From Chaos to Enemy: Encounters with

Monsters in Early Irish Texts : an Investigation Related to the Process of Christianization and the

Concept of Evil (IP, 29), 1996; M. Conti, The Life and Works of Potamius of Lisbon. A Bio-

graphical and Literary Study with English Translation and a Complete Commentary on the Extant

the new subtitle of Sacris Erudiri, which was changed from `Jaarboek

voor godsdienstwetenschappen' into `A Journal on the Inheritance of

Early and Medieval Christianity'. In the text-editions it offers, the CC

will continue to aim at the highest standards, ensuring that each edi-

tion, as well as offering a reliable text, will also document its trans-

mission. The creation and compilation of various electronic tools,

which integrate material from the CC and also enrich this with mate-

rial external to the collection, will also continue under direction of

Paul Tombeur. Furthermore, the CC is pleased to continue the var-

ious existing series and subseries, as administered in Steenbrugge and

elsewhere. It will keep offering publication possibilities in Sacris Eru-

diri and Instrumenta Patristica et Medieualia without restriction as to the

topic. New offerings for publication projects, individual editions or

even proposals for a possible subseries within an existing series, will

be welcomed with enthusiasm and reviewed critically.

In addition to continuing the existing projects and with the pro-

spect of incorporating new ones, the question should also be asked as

to whether there are any new challenges yet to be addressed by a col-

lective enterprise like the Corpus Christianorum. I mention two ex-

amples which are linked to the early history of the enterprise but

which, so far, have failed to be realized. The first concerns translations.

Though this was explicitly proposed by Dekkers when he initiated the

project, (91) only in a few rare cases has the Corpus published texts ac-

companied by a translation in a modern language on the facing

page. (92) In view of the diminishing knowledge of classical lan-

ö53ö

Works (IP, 32), 1998; T. O'Loughlin, Teachers and Code-breakers : the Latin Genesis Tradi-

tion, 430-800 (IP, 35), 1998; L.H. Westra, The Apostles' Creed: Origin, History, and Some

Early Commentaries (IPM 43), 2002.

(91) See AProposed New Edition, 412-413.

(92) Such exceptions are SL 69A (Potamius), 113 (Isidorus), 133-133A (Aenigmata),

the Opera Omnia of Ruusbroec (original Middledutch accompanied by the Latin trans-

lation of Surius (1552) and a translation in modern English) as well as some volumes in

the Series Graeca (e.g. vols. 29, 32 and 35, containing the Tractatus contra Damianum of

Petrus Callinicus).

guages, it might be worthwhile to reconsider this policy as adopted inpractice thus far. Indeed, the point could be made that includingtranslations in the CC is perfectly in line with its basic mission, i.e.fostering the study of the Church Fathers.

A second interesting focus could be that of ancient versiones. DomDekkers has already pointed to this field of study in an article in oneof the first issues of Sacris Erudiri. (93) Some of the volumes publishedwithin the CC offer important material in this regard. The Series Grae-ca, in particular, comes to mind here, because this series is often notonly presenting the Greek original but also its ancient and medievaltranslations. Besides the volumes of the subseries of the Corpus Na-

zianzenum, which presents the Oriental versions of Gregory's works,one can also refer, in this regard, to several volumes devoted to theworks of Maximus the Confessor. In the edition of his Quaestiones adThalassium (SG 7 and 22) the Greek text is accompanied by the Latintranslation of John Scotus Eriugena. The Series Graeca also includesthe Latin translation of the Ambigua ad Ioannem (SG 18), the Latintranslation by Anastasius Bibliothecarius which illustrates the life ofMaximus (SG 39), and two Latin translations of the Liber Asceticus

(SG 40). These are but a few examples of materials within the CorpusChristianorum which show the vital importance of studying the trans-mission of texts and ideas between East and West. Continuing and in-creasing these efforts to offer bilingual editionsºif possible, in colla-boration with other enterprises engaged in the preparation of text-editionsºcan not only foster the study of their transmission but mightalso encourage the study of the process of translation and of the dis-tribution of texts in Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages.

I would like to end this survey covering fifty years of Corpus Chris-tianorum, in the same way that Eligius Dekkers ended his program-matic essays on the Series Latina and the Continuatio Mediaeualis : with acall for cooperation. Over the past five decades, the Corpus Christia-

ö 54ö

(93) E. Dekkers, `Les traductions grecques des eè crits patristiques latins', in Sacris

Erudiri, 5 (1953), 193-233.

norum developed into what it is now, thanks to hundreds of collabora-

tors from all over the world. They offered the results of their scho-

larly endeavours for inclusion in the series of the Corpus and thus

drove it forward. They have always presented us with new ideas and

projects. They deserve thanks for their trust and collaboration. Look-

ing towards the future, I wish to express the hope that this dynamic

collaborative effort may be continued and strengthened. The Scien-

tific Committee and all scholars attached to the CC will do their ut-

most best and invest all their expertise to ensure the flourishing of the

CC. In the end, though, it all depends on the collaboration of the in-

ternational scholarly community. Without this, the CC would again

become what it initially was: a group scholars working in an abbey on

text-editions of the Fathers. All, therefore, are warmly invited to come

forward with their various contributions to the basic mission of the

Corpus Christianorum and of patristic and medieval scholarship in gen-

eral : editing the Fathers, understanding the Fathers, learning from the

Fathers but, above all, enjoying the Fathers.

Johan Leemans

Postdoctoral Fellow of the FSR-FFaculty of Theology

K.U. Leuven

ö55ö